Liberty India v. CIT

317 ITR 218Supreme Court of India2009#109 most cited

What is Liberty India v. CIT authority for?

The Supreme Court clarified that for profits and gains to be eligible for deductions under sections like 10B, 80IA, or 80IB, the income must be "derived from" or have a direct nexus to the eligible business activity. Income from incidental sources like the sale of scrips/licenses or interest on employee loans is generally not considered as derived from the eligible business for such deductions.

571

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Liberty India v. CIT · 317 ITR 218 · section 10B · section 80IA · section 80IB · profits derived from · direct nexus · eligible business · export undertaking deduction · sale of scrips income · interest income deduction

Also reported as

183 Taxmann 349

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 10BSection 80IBSection 147Section 80IASection 1961Section 250
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 75section 80hsection 80hhsection 80hhcsection 80icsection 80ibeligible businessdeduction under section 80iasection 80isection 80iadisallowance u/s 14agross total income

Judgments citing Liberty India v. CIT

Hero Motocorp Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal No. 2424/Del/ 2015 filed by the revenue in assessment year 2010-11 is partly allowed

ITA 1616/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…: 158) We have heard the rival contentions. Our findings on the various issues raised by the assessing officer are given in seriatim hereunder: 1. Interest on loan given at subsidized rates to employees The Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India vs. CIT: 317 ITR 218, has held that source of income beyond the first degree nexus with the manufacturing operation cannot be considered as derived from such business/activity. Following the aforesaid decision, the Courts / Tribunal in certain cases have held that interest income earned from fixed deposits made by the eligible unit is not eligible for deduction under…

DCIT 9(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Dodson Lindblom Hydro Power P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6704/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & C. N. Prasadआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./6704/Mum/2016, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dy. Cit 9(3)(1) M/S. Dodson Lindblom Hydro Power Pvt. 215, 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Ltd. Mumbai - 400020 Vs. 6-Shiv Vastu, Tejpal Scheme Road No.5, Vile Parle (E),Mumbai - 400057 Pan:Aaacd7612A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Ram Tiwari-Dr Assessee By: Shri Pankaj K. Jain-Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12/06/2018 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 12/06/2018 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य सद"य,राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार /Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 24.08.2016 Of Cit(A)-16, Mumbai,The Assessing Officer (Ao) Has Filed The Present Appeal. Assessee-Company,Engaged In The Business Of Generation Of Hydro Electric Power, Filed Its Return Of Income On 21.09.2012, Declaring Total Income At Rs.2.57 Crore, Later On A Revised Return Was Filed On 19.08.2013 Declaring Income At Rs.1.96 Crores.On 25.09. 2013,The Assessee Revised The Return For The Second Time Disclosing Income Of Rs.3.57 Cores. The Ao Completed The Assessment On 28.02.2015,U/S.143(3) Of The Act,Determining Its Income At Rs. 5.53 Crores.

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj K. Jain-ARFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari-DR
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई मुंबई “डी डी” खंडपीठ खंडपीठ आयकर आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई डी डी खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal “D”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"", लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं सी सी. एन एन. "साद "साद, "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं सी सी एन एन "साद "साद "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य Before S/Sh. Rajendra, Accountant Member & C. N. Prasad, Judicial Member आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./6704/Mum/2016, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dy. CIT 9…

Strides Arcolab Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. Asst Cir 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 8614/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Strides Shasun Limited The Asst. Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Strides Income Tax Circle 10(3), Arcolab Limited) 201, Mumbai Vs. Devavrata, Sector 17, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400 703 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aadcs8104P

For Appellant: Percy J. Pardiwala &For Respondent: Jayant Kumar &
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 1O

…allowable. It is now established law that to be eligible for deductions and exemptions, the 'first degree nexus' with the eligible income is sine-qua-non. This stands eloquently propositioned by the Apex Court in its decision in the case Liberty India vs. CIT 317 ITR 218. Enumerating in the context of eligibility of DEPB 6 income for deduction u/s. BOIB, the Apex Court has laid down the principle that any income beyond the first degree nexus between the profits and the undertaking would constitute an independent source of income and would not be eligible for the deduction. While coming to this decision, the Apex…

The ITO, Ward-5(2), Ahmedabad vs. Parry Enginnering & Electronics Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1034/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Rajpal Yadavसव"ी Izeksn Dqekj Izeksn Dqekj Izeksn Dqekj लेखा सद"य, एवं राजपाल यादव "या"यक सद"य के सम"। Izeksn Dqekj आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1033 & 1034/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Income Tax Officer, Parry Engineering & Ward-3(1)(2), Vs Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Ahmedabad. B-608, Nirman Complex, Opp. Havmore Restaurant, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacp 6747 J अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr.D.R. Assessee By : Shri G. C. Pipara, A.R.

For Appellant: Shri G. C. Pipara, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr.D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…ee under section 80-IA for the quantum claimed by the assessee without diluting the same by the notional deduction of earlier loss and depreciation. On the other hand, the reliance placed by the. A.O. on the decision in the case of Liberty India Ltd. Vs. CIT 317 ITR 218 (SC) is not relevant to the facts of the present case and since direct judgments applicable to the facts of the appellant's case are available, the same are followed. Considering the facts and the legal decisions relied upon by the appellant, I am inclined to accept the same and the A.O. is directed to delete the disallowance of deduction u/s. 8…

The ACIT, Circle-5, Ahmedabad vs. Parry Enginnering & Electronics Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1033/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Rajpal Yadavसव"ी Izeksn Dqekj Izeksn Dqekj Izeksn Dqekj लेखा सद"य, एवं राजपाल यादव "या"यक सद"य के सम"। Izeksn Dqekj आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1033 & 1034/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Income Tax Officer, Parry Engineering & Ward-3(1)(2), Vs Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Ahmedabad. B-608, Nirman Complex, Opp. Havmore Restaurant, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacp 6747 J अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr.D.R. Assessee By : Shri G. C. Pipara, A.R.

For Appellant: Shri G. C. Pipara, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr.D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…ee under section 80-IA for the quantum claimed by the assessee without diluting the same by the notional deduction of earlier loss and depreciation. On the other hand, the reliance placed by the. A.O. on the decision in the case of Liberty India Ltd. Vs. CIT 317 ITR 218 (SC) is not relevant to the facts of the present case and since direct judgments applicable to the facts of the appellant's case are available, the same are followed. Considering the facts and the legal decisions relied upon by the appellant, I am inclined to accept the same and the A.O. is directed to delete the disallowance of deduction u/s. 8…

Asst CIT Cen Cir 31 Cen RG 7, Mumbai vs. Kukreja Construction Co., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6421/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri J.P. BairagraFor Respondent: Shri M.V. Rajguru
Section 80I

…leted before handing over the project to society, therefore, there is a first degree nexus between the said income and construction activity/industrial undertaking. He has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India Vs. CIT (317 ITR 218) as well as the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Syntel Limited in Income Tax Appeal nos. 1974, 1976 and 1978 of 2009 dated 15.12.2009. The Ld. Authorized Representative has also relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Tolaram & Co. dated 19.10.2011 for A.Y. 2006-07 and 2007-08. Thus the Ld. Au…

Ideal Toll & Infrastructure P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 6(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 7758/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…sessable as income from other sources. Some of the decisions relied upon by Ld CIT(A) are:- (a) Swani Spice Mills P Ltd (322 ITR 288)(Bom) (b) Tuticorin Alkali Chemical & Fertilisers (227 ITR 172)(SC) (c) Pandian Chemicals (262 ITR 278)(SC) (d) Liberty India (317 ITR 218)(SC) (e) Totgars Co-operative Sale society (322 ITR 283)(SC) (f) Gopinathan (248 ITR 449)(SC) 27. We heard the parties on this issue and perused the record. We notice that the various decisions relied upon by the Ld CIT(A) relate to the interest income earned on investment of “surplus funds”. The decision rendered in the case of Pandian Chemical…

Endress + Hauser Flowtec (India) Pvt. Ltd., Aurangabad vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 996/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.949/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AvchatFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha, JCIT
Section 10BSection 271(1)(c)

…9,36,971/- on account of miscellaneous income. The assessee has treated the said income as business income and claimed deduction u/s.10B of the Act. CIT(A) relying on the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Pandian Chemicals Ltd. 262 ITR 278, Liberty India 317 ITR 218 and CIT Vs. Sterling Foods 237 ITR 579 denied the claim of the assessee. 24. Aggrieved with such confirmation, assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 25. Regarding the issues of claim of deduction u/s.10B of the Act, Ld. Counsel for the assessee filed the following submissions: “The AO has reduced following as income from ot…

Endress + Hauser Flowtec (India) Pvt. Ltd., Aurangabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 995/PUN/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.949/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AvchatFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha, JCIT
Section 10BSection 271(1)(c)

…9,36,971/- on account of miscellaneous income. The assessee has treated the said income as business income and claimed deduction u/s.10B of the Act. CIT(A) relying on the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Pandian Chemicals Ltd. 262 ITR 278, Liberty India 317 ITR 218 and CIT Vs. Sterling Foods 237 ITR 579 denied the claim of the assessee. 24. Aggrieved with such confirmation, assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 25. Regarding the issues of claim of deduction u/s.10B of the Act, Ld. Counsel for the assessee filed the following submissions: “The AO has reduced following as income from ot…

Deputu Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. M/S. Endress + Hauser Flowtec (India) P.Ltd., Aurangabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 949/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.949/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AvchatFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha, JCIT
Section 10BSection 271(1)(c)

…9,36,971/- on account of miscellaneous income. The assessee has treated the said income as business income and claimed deduction u/s.10B of the Act. CIT(A) relying on the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Pandian Chemicals Ltd. 262 ITR 278, Liberty India 317 ITR 218 and CIT Vs. Sterling Foods 237 ITR 579 denied the claim of the assessee. 24. Aggrieved with such confirmation, assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 25. Regarding the issues of claim of deduction u/s.10B of the Act, Ld. Counsel for the assessee filed the following submissions: “The AO has reduced following as income from ot…

Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, (OSD), Range-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

ITA 3086/AHD/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Maurya, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ - अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH ‘D’ BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sr. ITA No. and Appellant Respondent No. Asstt.Year DCIT(OSD), Range-1 1-3 692/Ahd/2011 With Dishman CO No.89/Ahd/2011 Ahmedabad Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd. Asstt.Year 2005-06 Bhadraj-Raj Chambers Swastik Cross Road AND Navrangpura, 2447/Ahd/2011 Ahmedabad. Asstt.Year 2005-06 PAN : AAACD 4164 D DCIT(OSD), Range-1 4 2957/Ahd/2013 Dishman Asstt.Year 2006-07 Ahmedabad Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd. Bhadraj-Raj Chambers Swastik C…

The ACIT, (OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

ITA 2957/AHD/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Maurya, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ - अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH ‘D’ BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sr. ITA No. and Appellant Respondent No. Asstt.Year DCIT(OSD), Range-1 1-3 692/Ahd/2011 With Dishman CO No.89/Ahd/2011 Ahmedabad Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd. Asstt.Year 2005-06 Bhadraj-Raj Chambers Swastik Cross Road AND Navrangpura, 2447/Ahd/2011 Ahmedabad. Asstt.Year 2005-06 PAN : AAACD 4164 D DCIT(OSD), Range-1 4 2957/Ahd/2013 Dishman Asstt.Year 2006-07 Ahmedabad Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd. Bhadraj-Raj Chambers Swastik C…

The DCIT(OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad vs. Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

ITA 817/AHD/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Maurya, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ - अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH ‘D’ BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sr. ITA No. and Appellant Respondent No. Asstt.Year DCIT(OSD), Range-1 1-3 692/Ahd/2011 With Dishman CO No.89/Ahd/2011 Ahmedabad Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd. Asstt.Year 2005-06 Bhadraj-Raj Chambers Swastik Cross Road AND Navrangpura, 2447/Ahd/2011 Ahmedabad. Asstt.Year 2005-06 PAN : AAACD 4164 D DCIT(OSD), Range-1 4 2957/Ahd/2013 Dishman Asstt.Year 2006-07 Ahmedabad Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd. Bhadraj-Raj Chambers Swastik C…

Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT., (OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

ITA 773/AHD/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Maurya, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ - अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH ‘D’ BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sr. ITA No. and Appellant Respondent No. Asstt.Year DCIT(OSD), Range-1 1-3 692/Ahd/2011 With Dishman CO No.89/Ahd/2011 Ahmedabad Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd. Asstt.Year 2005-06 Bhadraj-Raj Chambers Swastik Cross Road AND Navrangpura, 2447/Ahd/2011 Ahmedabad. Asstt.Year 2005-06 PAN : AAACD 4164 D DCIT(OSD), Range-1 4 2957/Ahd/2013 Dishman Asstt.Year 2006-07 Ahmedabad Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd. Bhadraj-Raj Chambers Swastik C…

The DCIT(OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad vs. Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

ITA 692/AHD/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 May 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Maurya, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ - अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH ‘D’ BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sr. ITA No. and Appellant Respondent No. Asstt.Year DCIT(OSD), Range-1 1-3 692/Ahd/2011 With Dishman CO No.89/Ahd/2011 Ahmedabad Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd. Asstt.Year 2005-06 Bhadraj-Raj Chambers Swastik Cross Road AND Navrangpura, 2447/Ahd/2011 Ahmedabad. Asstt.Year 2005-06 PAN : AAACD 4164 D DCIT(OSD), Range-1 4 2957/Ahd/2013 Dishman Asstt.Year 2006-07 Ahmedabad Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd. Bhadraj-Raj Chambers Swastik C…

Pioneer Food and Agro Industries, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(3)(2) (Presently, ACIT-22(2)), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1454/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalpioneer Food & Agro Industries Krishna Kunj, 4A/3B, 1St Floor Banke Bihari Society ……………. Appellant 8Th Road, Pali Hill Khar West, Mumbai 400 052 Pan – Aajfp0506D V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–18(3)(2), Mumbai

For Appellant: Ms. Mrugakshi K. JoshiFor Respondent: Ms. N. Hemalatha
Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Pioneer Food And Agro Industries Krishna Kunj, 4A/3B, 1st Floor Banke Bihari Society ……………. Appellant 8th Road, Pali Hill Khar West, Mumbai 400 052 PAN – AAJFP0506D v/s Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–18(3)(2), Mumbai Assessee by : Ms. Mrugakshi K. Joshi Revenue by : Ms. N. Hemalatha Date of Hearing – 23.05.2018 Date of Order – 23.05.2018 O R D E R PERSAKTIJIT DEY, J.M. Aforesaid appeal by the assessee is against order dated 26th December 2017, passed by…

M/S Innova Captab, Baddi vs. DCIT, Parwanoo

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are

ITA 734/CHANDI/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 May 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta & Innova Captab, Vs. The D.C.I.T., Plot No.81B, Epip, Circle Parwanoo. Phase 1, Jhamajri Pan: Aaffv6014N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gulshan Raj, CIT DR
Section 80I

…ssee was not found to be acceptable by the Assessing Officer in the absence of first degree nexus of the said incomes with the business of the assessee and in view of the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Liberty India Ltd. Vs. CIT (317 ITR 218) and Pandian Chemicals Ltd. vs. CIT (SC)262 ITR 278 in this regard.The Assessing Officer accordingly held the amount of 6,36,887/- as ineligible for the claim of deduction u/s 80IC. 11. The Ld.CIT(Appeals) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer following the decision of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of Hycron Electronics (supra).…

Innova Captab, Baddi vs. DCIT, Parwanoo

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are

ITA 1184/CHANDI/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta & Innova Captab, Vs. The D.C.I.T., Plot No.81B, Epip, Circle Parwanoo. Phase 1, Jhamajri Pan: Aaffv6014N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gulshan Raj, CIT DR
Section 80I

…ssee was not found to be acceptable by the Assessing Officer in the absence of first degree nexus of the said incomes with the business of the assessee and in view of the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Liberty India Ltd. Vs. CIT (317 ITR 218) and Pandian Chemicals Ltd. vs. CIT (SC)262 ITR 278 in this regard.The Assessing Officer accordingly held the amount of 6,36,887/- as ineligible for the claim of deduction u/s 80IC. 11. The Ld.CIT(Appeals) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer following the decision of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of Hycron Electronics (supra).…

Manjeera Projects, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-6(1), Hyderabad

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 1082/HYD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Dr. K. Srinivas Reddy, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 80Section 801B(10)Section 80I

…ITA Nos 1704 1082 and 1230 Manjeera Projects Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member AND Shri S.Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member ITA Nos.1704/Hyd/2014, 1230/Hyd/2015 & 1082/Hyd/2016 (Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) Manjeera Projects Vs ITO Ward – 6 ( 2 ) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:AAOFM 0872 C (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri K.C. Devdas For Revenue : Dr. K. Srinivas Reddy, DR Date of Hearing: 13.02.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 27.04.2018 O R D E R Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. These are all as…

Manjeera Projects, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-6(2), Hyderabad

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 1230/HYD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Dr. K. Srinivas Reddy, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 80Section 801B(10)Section 80I

…ITA Nos 1704 1082 and 1230 Manjeera Projects Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member AND Shri S.Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member ITA Nos.1704/Hyd/2014, 1230/Hyd/2015 & 1082/Hyd/2016 (Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) Manjeera Projects Vs ITO Ward – 6 ( 2 ) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:AAOFM 0872 C (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri K.C. Devdas For Revenue : Dr. K. Srinivas Reddy, DR Date of Hearing: 13.02.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 27.04.2018 O R D E R Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. These are all as…